M262: My preferred Leica

[mountainpix]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

There has been quite a bit of talk about the M262, particularly along the lines of why would anyone buy a digital M without LiveView, even at a lower price as new, now that the M240 is available used for around $4k. "Why would you want to pay more for a camera without LiveView and video features, when you can simply opt to not use them if you don't need or want them."

 

For me, however, it was a direct comparison of an M240 and an M262 in the Washington, DC, Leica Store that sold me on the latter camera, after watching the evolution of digital Ms from the sidelines over the last decade. The simple fact is that, as far as I am concerned, the M262 delivers the Leica rangefinder experience I prefer, and the best digital M experience to date. Here's why:

 

1) Lighter weight: This is noticeable and significant. The M262 is just more pleasant to carry and hold up to the eye for extended periods of time.

2) Quieter, smoother shutter. The M262 is quiet, and sounds more like a Leica should.

3) Simpler menus

4) Simpler control set

5) Simpler "toolbox": Rangefinder and depth-of-field scale for focus, and ISO, shutter, aperture, center-weighted meter and playback LCD for control of exposure. Stills only. Everything I need and nothing I don't.

 

This is in course in light of the fact that I use Nikon D810s for most of my work, along with a wide range of lenses, and generally on a tripod. It's an immensely capable though a bulky and heavy system, and I make regular use of the camera's LiveView and video capabilities.

 

In a Leica rangefinder camera, and I seek portability, simplicity, quality, and freedom, not a mountain of features.

 

I have enjoyed Leica M cameras for decades specifically because they encourage a way of working that is more in the moment, and more about being tuned into the situation one is working with. The excellent rangefinder enables quick, accurate framing and focus, and zone focusing is an immensely useful tool. I really don't want to get bogged down with wondering whether I should tweak this or that shot into micron-perfect focus in LiveView at the expense of spontaneity and timing, and I have no interest in using adapted non-M-mount lenses on a Leica M camera. The meter is great, and center-weighted will do nicely, thanks. The M240 has spot and "matrix" metering via LiveView, but I don't need them.

 

The bottom line is that the M262 is a superb Leica rangefinder camera, that gets out of the photographer's way and does its job very well indeed.

 

 

[Advertisement]

The Leica Q3 is available for pre-order at B&H Photo Video and Adorama

[Manoleica]

There has been quite a bit of talk about the M262, particularly along the lines of why would anyone buy a digital M without LiveView, even at a lower price as new, now that the M240 is available used for around $4k. "Why would you want to pay more for a camera without LiveView and video features, when you can simply opt to not use them if you don't need or want them."

 

For me, however, it was a direct comparison of an M240 and an M262 in the Washington, DC, Leica Store that sold me on the latter camera, after watching the evolution of digital Ms from the sidelines over the last decade. The simple fact is that, as far as I am concerned, the M262 delivers the Leica rangefinder experience I prefer, and the best digital M experience to date. Here's why:

 

1) Lighter weight: This is noticeable and significant. The M262 is just more pleasant to carry and hold up to the eye for extended periods of time.

2) Quieter, smoother shutter. The M262 is quiet, and sounds more like a Leica should.

3) Simpler menus

4) Simpler control set

5) Simpler "toolbox": Rangefinder and depth-of-field scale for focus, and ISO, shutter, aperture, center-weighted meter and playback LCD for control of exposure. Stills only. Everything I need and nothing I don't.

 

This is in course in light of the fact that I use Nikon D810s for most of my work, along with a wide range of lenses, and generally on a tripod. It's an immensely capable though a bulky and heavy system, and I make regular use of the camera's LiveView and video capabilities.

 

In a Leica rangefinder camera, and I seek portability, simplicity, quality, and freedom, not a mountain of features.

 

I have enjoyed Leica M cameras for decades specifically because they encourage a way of working that is more in the moment, and more about being tuned into the situation one is working with. The excellent rangefinder enables quick, accurate framing and focus, and zone focusing is an immensely useful tool. I really don't want to get bogged down with wondering whether I should tweak this or that shot into micron-perfect focus in LiveView at the expense of spontaneity and timing, and I have no interest in using adapted non-M-mount lenses on a Leica M camera. The meter is great, and center-weighted will do nicely, thanks. The M240 has spot and "matrix" metering via LiveView, but I don't need them.

 

The bottom line is that the M262 is a superb Leica rangefinder camera, that gets out of the photographer's way and does its job very well indeed.

Excellent write up, we look forward to seeing your images..

[jaapv]

It sounds like this is a good camera for you. I prefer the 240 as it saves me carrying two systems and gives me the option of the occasional video shot, making it more universal as a daily use and travel camera. It shows that there is no general best in this game, just best for me.

[elmars]

"1) Lighter weight: This is noticeable and significant. The M262 is just more pleasant to carry and hold up to the eye for extended periods of time.

 

2) Quieter, smoother shutter. The M262 is quiet, and sounds more like a Leica should.

3) Simpler menus

4) Simpler control set

5) Simpler "toolbox": Rangefinder and depth-of-field scale for focus, and ISO, shutter, aperture, center-weighted meter and playback LCD for control of exposure. Stills only. Everything I need and nothing I don't.

 

...

 

The bottom line is that the M262 is a superb Leica rangefinder camera, that gets out of the photographer's way and does its job very well indeed."

 

 

I bought the M262 for the same reasons and one more: She is more beautiful than the M240. Here is my little review (sorry only in german):

 

http://www.l-camera-forum.com/topic/255274-m-262-review/

 

Elmar

[Mornnb]

I require the M240. I often shoot the Tri-Elmar and other wides, an EVF and Liveview are much nicer to use than an external optical VF.

Another issue is when shooting on a tripod for landscape, live view is really quite essential. The M262 is not for me, I regard live view as a basic feature in a modern camera. Not an 'extra'.

[ayewing]

I require the M240. I often shoot the Tri-Elmar and other wides, an EVF and Liveview are much nicer to use than an external optical VF.

Another issue is when shooting on a tripod for landscape, live view is really quite essential. The M262 is not for me, I regard live view as a basic feature in a modern camera. Not an 'extra'.

 

I agree. The reduction in weight is minimal and while a quieter shutter is an advantage I do not think these outweigh the enormous increase in versatility provided by live view which makes the use of lenses wider than 28mm and longer than 90mm practical as well as simplifying macro photography not to mention the ability to check the accuracy of the rangefinder calibration.

[mountainpix]

Advertisement (gone after registration)

It sounds like this is a good camera for you. I prefer the 240 as it saves me carrying two systems and gives me the option of the occasional video shot, making it more universal as a daily use and travel camera. It shows that there is no general best in this game, just best for me.

 

Exactly. If I were to choose to make Leica M my only camera system, the M240 would be the obvious choice, specifically because of its additional functionality. It's clear to me, however, that a Leica doesn't eliminate my need for DSLRs. Rather, I choose to use a Leica specifically to take advantage of the rangefinder camera's traditional strengths, and the M262 is an excellent solution.

[Jeff S]

Makes sense for you, but not sure I understand #5....I have the M240 and I always disable video and typically disable LV....which means those functions are deleted from my 'toolbox' whenever I want, with no intrusion whatsoever....for all intents and purposes, they're gone.  

 

But if I want to determine if my camera/lens is focusing appropriately (a common issue in the digital M age), I can simply turn LV back on and do a simple focus calibration check.   Then I can turn it back off.  Nice feature to have....without changing the camera ergonomics at all...the lower weight of the M262 derives from aluminum, not LV or video.

 

If I were buying again (the choice wasn't offered at the time), I'd have to weigh the pros/cons, with the new shutter re-cock and price possibly being differentiators.  I don't care about video, but LV offers useful, even if occasional, benefits for me.  

 

Nice that Leica offers the choice....will be interesting to see the direction of the new M and whether the choices will remain longer term.

 

Jeff

[Bill Livingston]

Exactly. If I were to choose to make Leica M my only camera system, the M240 would be the obvious choice, specifically because of its additional functionality. It's clear to me, however, that a Leica doesn't eliminate my need for DSLRs. Rather, I choose to use a Leica specifically to take advantage of the rangefinder camera's traditional strengths, and the M262 is an excellent solution.

 

Agree completely.

 

I have chosen to use just one camera system from now on and my M-P 240 is perfect for me. If I had a need for a DSLR then the 262 would have been my choice.

 

It sounds like you have bought the ideal camera for you, as have we. That's one of the reasons the M 262 was so welcomed by most Leica users.

 

Leica seems to have made some good decisions recently... The Q is exceptionally good, the SL could well lead the pro market from SLR to mirrorless with the likes of Nikon and Canon moving into that market sector... certainly the results from SL are absolutely wonderful... then the 262 which ticks all the right the boxes for the more traditional M user, or for those with multiple camera sŷstems who want the experience of RF photography.  Good times for Leica.

 

The new M, when it eventually appears, will need to be something exceptional if many users are going to upgrade at the next cycle. 

 

Leica's current and newly released cameras are going to be a VERY hard act to follow....

[mountainpix]

I agree. The reduction in weight is minimal and while a quieter shutter is an advantage I do not think these outweigh the enormous increase in versatility provided by live view which makes the use of lenses wider than 28mm and longer than 90mm practical as well as simplifying macro photography not to mention the ability to check the accuracy of the rangefinder calibration.

 

Quite right. If I needed to do macro work or have super-precise control of framing and focus (particularly using extreme focal lengths) with a Leica, the M240 would be the way to go. Those are things I use my Nikons for. For me, the Leica is for a different kind of photography, with emphasis on spontaneity, and the limitations of rangefinder focus and framing are easily adapted to and overcome.

 

As for checking rangefinder calibration, this can still be easily achieved with the M262 by simply using the image playback function.

[bocaburger]

It's all completely subjective.  I'm just happy to see Leica being responsive to customer demand.  I think it's cool they were able to make the M262 a little bit quieter and a little bit lighter, and hope they are secretly working on reducing the bulk as well, back in the direction of the film M cameras of yore.  And maybe delete those infernal LED frame lines in favor of the former system which worked superbly for 60 years. 

[marchyman]

The 262 is the camera for me, too.  I think.  I hope.  It is the camera I have on order.  It seems to be mostly out of stock in the US.

 

The 262 may never be the only camera I carry and I have other cameras to use when I want macro mode, live view, video, etc.

[Mark Pope]

I had wondered about the 262, but as I like using a 21mm lens, the 90mm macro Elmar and now a 135mm Tele-Elmar, I'm glad I went for the 240.  As others have already said, the live view is very nice to have.  I could live without it, but it's really very useful when the need for critical focus or composition is there.  I think both are a significant step up from the M9 and I'm very happy to have upgraded when I did.

[gpwhite]

It's all completely subjective.  

 

I don't see how you can post that!  

 

From what I read, almost every one of the posts on the forum contain some sort of factoid supporting an "objective" evaluation of something. Indeed, a very nice thread discussing the 50/1 as a lens that gives esoteric rendering is full of debate about Merriam Webster's and Oxford's usage for esoteric.

 

Only the semi-ambivalent posts might brush subjectivity 

[ECohen]

There has been quite a bit of talk about the M262, particularly along the lines of why would anyone buy a digital M without LiveView, even at a lower price as new, now that the M240 is available used for around $4k. "Why would you want to pay more for a camera without LiveView and video features, when you can simply opt to not use them if you don't need or want them."

 

For me, however, it was a direct comparison of an M240 and an M262 in the Washington, DC, Leica Store that sold me on the latter camera, after watching the evolution of digital Ms from the sidelines over the last decade. The simple fact is that, as far as I am concerned, the M262 delivers the Leica rangefinder experience I prefer, and the best digital M experience to date. Here's why:

 

1) Lighter weight: This is noticeable and significant. The M262 is just more pleasant to carry and hold up to the eye for extended periods of time.

2) Quieter, smoother shutter. The M262 is quiet, and sounds more like a Leica should.

3) Simpler menus

4) Simpler control set

5) Simpler "toolbox": Rangefinder and depth-of-field scale for focus, and ISO, shutter, aperture, center-weighted meter and playback LCD for control of exposure. Stills only. Everything I need and nothing I don't.

 

This is in course in light of the fact that I use Nikon D810s for most of my work, along with a wide range of lenses, and generally on a tripod. It's an immensely capable though a bulky and heavy system, and I make regular use of the camera's LiveView and video capabilities.

 

In a Leica rangefinder camera, and I seek portability, simplicity, quality, and freedom, not a mountain of features.

 

I have enjoyed Leica M cameras for decades specifically because they encourage a way of working that is more in the moment, and more about being tuned into the situation one is working with. The excellent rangefinder enables quick, accurate framing and focus, and zone focusing is an immensely useful tool. I really don't want to get bogged down with wondering whether I should tweak this or that shot into micron-perfect focus in LiveView at the expense of spontaneity and timing, and I have no interest in using adapted non-M-mount lenses on a Leica M camera. The meter is great, and center-weighted will do nicely, thanks. The M240 has spot and "matrix" metering via LiveView, but I don't need them.

 

The bottom line is that the M262 is a superb Leica rangefinder camera, that gets out of the photographer's way and does its job very well indeed.

 

 

 

Very sound and I agree with you completely........as long as you have the 810  for those times you want a 21mm or macro lens

[Tailwagger]

I faced the same choice, went the opposite way. While its certainly true that so far I've rarely used the EVF,  it results in a more versatile camera. One advantage of the EVF is that it doesn't lose precision over time.  If nothing else it will come in handy down the line to determine the accuracy of the RF with each of my lenses. As for weight, I don't find the M unduly heavy. In fact my impression is that I can shoot about a stop slower with the M than any of my other lighter mirrorless cameras.  Rightly or wrongly, I attribute it to more mass in less space, though perhaps the  the 262 exhibits similar behavior. Regardless, I'm with Jaap, each has its strengths depending on the POV.  Best of luck!

[dunhoy]

Each to their own - the bean counters and marketing bullshitters at Leica know exactly what they are doing with their M releases and much like a certain German sports car manufacturer, when they introduce a stripped down version, they are careful to ensure it does not cannibalise sales of the more profitable fully featured model.

 

Were I buying today I would take the 262 over the 240 -  I resented "paying" for Live View and Video when I got the 240 but I had no choice.

 

A stripped down Monochrome (no LV, No Video) in a body the size of a film MP at the price of a film M - now that would be worth buying - so why not Leica?

[Mornnb]

Each to their own - the bean counters and marketing bullshitters at Leica know exactly what they are doing with their M releases and much like a certain German sports car manufacturer, when they introduce a stripped down version, they are careful to ensure it does not cannibalise sales of the more profitable fully featured model

And that is the only reason live view is left out of the M262. Cannibalisation fears. Once you have a CMOS sensor and a CPU capable you essentially get live view for free, it is not saving them a lot of money to leave it out.

[Advertisement]

Hallo,

Look here: Leica M

[bocaburger]

2 days ago there was a fellow on our local Kijiji put up an add, it went like this he is willing to trade a m240 less then a year old along with a mint in a box 28mm summicron asph. For a brand new m262.

His logic was he did not like the live view because it accidentally went off as he was walking around with the camera slung from his neck, thus draining his batteries.

I managed to talk him out of it considering he could buy a new battery for 200 dollars vs loosing a 4000 dollar lens.

Or he could simply use the menu item to disable the live view button for free.   The lighter weight and quieter shutter I kinda get, although having handled both cameras together the weight difference was only noticeable to me while holding both bodies sans lens one in each hand at the same time weighing them out like a balance scale; and likewise I could only detect the noise difference in a quiet room.  Out on the street, with lenses mounted, I stood a few feet away while my wife fired the cameras and I couldn't hear a significant difference, and my hearing is very acute.  The fact is today there are very capable cameras that are completely silent, so if that criterion was essential to my photography, neither the 240 nor 262 would be my choice. 

 

As to the Live View and Video deletions, it kinda appears to me something of an OCD-like situation that people find it somehow more emotionally comforting than merely disabling the features and ignoring the buttons.  If Leica allowed reprogramming those buttons perhaps there would be even less impetus for wanting them gone. 

[azuled]

Being in the "doesn't mind live view, but also doesn't use it" camp:  being able to reprogram the top button would be a real bonus for me.  That's the only thing I'm moderately jealous of in the 262.  The quick access to WB, even though I shoot raw and it doesn't matter, would satisfy my desire to tinker and adjust.